[botantler-1]

Automated update of the agent skill at plugins/engineering-practices/skills/write-readme to its latest version.

Each changed skill gets its own pull request, so one blocked update does not hold back the others.

[devantler]

🤖 Generated by the Agentic Engineer

@coderabbitai full review

[coderabbitai]

⚠️ Action not completed

Review skipped.

[coderabbitai]

Important

Review skipped

This PR was authored by a bot without an assigned CodeRabbit review seat. Ask an organization administrator to assign a seat to the bot. See the seat-assignment guide. After the seat is assigned, request a review again.

Run configuration

• Source mode: Auto
• Repository: Unavailable
• Branch: Unavailable
• File: No configuration file from this repository applied
• Commit: Unavailable
• Layers: Organization UI
• Review profile: ASSERTIVE
• Plan: Advanced
• Run ID: af2cb4eb-e88c-40d5-adc7-ca58857ee6d4

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

• Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[devantler]

🤖 Generated by the Agentic Engineer

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review	Status	Commit	Review trigger
📝 Code Review	✅ Completed 2026-10-26T06:57:12.633244Z	0afaf12	Manual request

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. You're on a roll.

Reviewed commit: 0afaf12162

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

• Open a pull request for review
• Mark a draft as ready
• Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[devantler]

🤖 Generated by the Agentic Engineer

Release-range and static evaluation at 0afaf12162a990d54dac9dd33ee25d37e08956fe:

I read all eight published releases from v1.24.1 through v1.28.1, the complete tag comparison, and both source trees. There is no separately published changelog or migration guide. The only change to the consumed write-readme skill is v1.28.0's four-line guidance to use Mermaid diagrams and narrow directory trees; this update adopts it. The release-review procedure (v1.25.0), documentation skill (v1.26.0), hosted posture work (v1.27.0), release/ways-of-working changes (v1.27.1), size and reference-file work (v1.27.2), native triage metadata (v1.27.3), new documentation-introduction skill (v1.28.0), and maintenance reference split (v1.28.1) concern other paths and introduce no adaptation for this one-skill update. The LICENSE blob is unchanged (261eeb9e9f8b2b4b0d119366dda99c6fd7d35c64).

The target tag independently identifies the consumed skill tree as f5de4610a39834eefc9c25ae8e1c80b66e0914d3, matching the generated provenance. The complete six-file PR diff contains that prose/provenance change and its generated 1.1.6 manifest/changelog updates. I traced the portable and strict plugin manifests through both marketplace entries; the version and source agree. This is static evaluation of authored guidance and packaging, with no separately exercisable application runtime; it does not prove how a future agent will follow the guidance. No authority, execution, credential or publication boundary changes.

Native validation passed manifest, packaged-resource, skill-specification, version and bundled-edit checks. The programmed-updater classifier returns 3: trusted provenance, semantic review still required. CodeRabbit skipped this bot-authored PR because it lacks a review seat; Codex review is requested. The native code-quality rule remains unreadable to the API helper and is not claimed passed; protected merge must decide it.

[devantler]

🤖 Generated by the Agentic Engineer

Post-merge verification is complete for source delivery. GitHub protected merge accepted the evaluated head 0afaf12162a990d54dac9dd33ee25d37e08956fe as bbe9fde8d331376996d70405aab45ced2fbb9b09. Main CI 40284112872 succeeded at that merge commit, as did both managed scanning and code-quality workflows and the open-PR recheck.

The distributed write-readme tree is 3ac53b0b657cf9a7f6344fb99a9cf2ac81397160 at both the reviewed PR head and merge commit; the generated provenance names the separately verified upstream tree f5de4610a39834eefc9c25ae8e1c80b66e0914d3. The engineering-practices package update is 1.1.6. This verifies the reviewed source and packaging delivery, not a consumer runtime reload or future agent behavior. No installed plugin cache or runtime configuration changed.